linux-integrity.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hao Wu <hao.wu@rubrik.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shrihari Kalkar <shrihari.kalkar@rubrik.com>,
	Seungyeop Han <seungyeop.han@rubrik.com>,
	Anish Jhaveri <anish.jhaveri@rubrik.com>,
	peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
	Ken Goldman <kgold@linux.ibm.com>,
	zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, why2jjj.linux@gmail.com,
	Hamza Attak <hamza@hpe.com>,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, arnd@arndb.de,
	Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Atmel TPM crash caused by too frequent queries
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 22:49:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51DCB704-8E9D-40DD-9E81-F1D16EB28BD5@rubrik.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210623133518.5vykitqsdwtfqzd6@kernel.org>

> On Jun 23, 2021, at 6:35 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 04:18:09PM -0700, Hao Wu wrote:
>> This is a fix for the ATMEL TPM crash bug reported in
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-integrity/patch/20200926223150.109645-1-hao.wu@rubrik.com/
>> 
>> According to the discussions in the original thread,
>> we don't want to revert the timeout of wait_for_tpm_stat
>> for non-ATMEL chips, which brings back the performance cost.
>> For investigation and analysis of why wait_for_tpm_stat
>> caused the issue, and how the regression was introduced,
>> please read the original thread above.
>> 
>> Thus the proposed fix here is to only revert the timeout
>> for ATMEL chips by checking the vendor ID.
>> 
>> Test Plan:
>> - Run fixed kernel with ATMEL TPM chips and see crash
>>  has been fixed.
>> - Run fixed kernel with non-ATMEL TPM chips, and confirm
>>  the timeout has not been changed.
> 
> Please move test plan right before diffstat if you wan to include such,
> so that it does not go into the commit log.
Hi Jarkko, not sure I understood your suggestion or not. I removed
the test plan from the commit message in a updated commit
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-integrity/patch/20210624053321.861-1-hao.wu@rubrik.com/

Let me know if I misunderstood this. I am fine to not include test plan,
If this is not something expected by linux community.
I personally think it is helpful to understand the confidence of the commit.

> 
>> ---
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h          |  9 ++++++++-
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
>> include/linux/tpm.h             |  2 ++
>> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> index 283f78211c3a..bc6aa7f9e119 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> @@ -42,7 +42,9 @@ enum tpm_timeout {
>> 	TPM_TIMEOUT_RANGE_US = 300,	/* usecs */
>> 	TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL = 1,	/* msecs */
>> 	TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MIN = 100,      /* usecs */
>> -	TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX = 500      /* usecs */
>> +	TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX = 500,	/* usecs */
>> +	TPM_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT = 500,	/* usecs */
>> +	TPM_ATML_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT = 15000	/* usecs */
>> };
>> 
>> /* TPM addresses */
>> @@ -189,6 +191,11 @@ static inline void tpm_msleep(unsigned int delay_msec)
>> 		     delay_msec * 1000);
>> };
>> 
>> +static inline void tpm_usleep(unsigned int delay_usec)
>> +{
>> +	usleep_range(delay_usec - TPM_TIMEOUT_RANGE_US, delay_usec);
>> +};
>> +
>> int tpm_chip_start(struct tpm_chip *chip);
>> void tpm_chip_stop(struct tpm_chip *chip);
>> struct tpm_chip *tpm_find_get_ops(struct tpm_chip *chip);
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> index 55b9d3965ae1..9ddd4edfe1c2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> @@ -80,8 +80,12 @@ static int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
>> 		}
>> 	} else {
>> 		do {
>> -			usleep_range(TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MIN,
>> -				     TPM_TIMEOUT_USECS_MAX);
>> +			if (chip->timeout_wait_stat && 
>> +				chip->timeout_wait_stat >= TPM_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT) {
>> +				tpm_usleep((unsigned int)(chip->timeout_wait_stat));
>> +			} else {
>> +				tpm_usleep((unsigned int)(TPM_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT));
>> +			}
>> 			status = chip->ops->status(chip);
>> 			if ((status & mask) == mask)
>> 				return 0;
>> @@ -934,6 +938,8 @@ int tpm_tis_core_init(struct device *dev, struct tpm_tis_data *priv, int irq,
>> 	chip->timeout_b = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_TIMEOUT_B_MAX);
>> 	chip->timeout_c = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_TIMEOUT_C_MAX);
>> 	chip->timeout_d = msecs_to_jiffies(TIS_TIMEOUT_D_MAX);
>> +	/* init timeout for wait_for_tpm_stat */
>> +	chip->timeout_wait_stat = TPM_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT;
>> 	priv->phy_ops = phy_ops;
>> 	dev_set_drvdata(&chip->dev, priv);
>> 
>> @@ -983,6 +989,15 @@ int tpm_tis_core_init(struct device *dev, struct tpm_tis_data *priv, int irq,
>> 
>> 	priv->manufacturer_id = vendor;
>> 
>> +	switch (priv->manufacturer_id) {
>> +	case TPM_VID_ATML:
>> +        /* ATMEL chip needs longer timeout to avoid crash */
>> +		chip->timeout_wait_stat = TPM_ATML_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT;
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		chip->timeout_wait_stat = TPM_TIMEOUT_WAIT_STAT;
>> +	}
>> +
>> 	rc = tpm_tis_read8(priv, TPM_RID(0), &rid);
>> 	if (rc < 0)
>> 		goto out_err;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/tpm.h b/include/linux/tpm.h
>> index aa11fe323c56..35f2a0260d76 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/tpm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/tpm.h
>> @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ struct tpm_chip {
>> 	bool timeout_adjusted;
>> 	unsigned long duration[TPM_NUM_DURATIONS]; /* jiffies */
>> 	bool duration_adjusted;
>> +	unsigned long timeout_wait_stat; /* usecs */
>> 
>> 	struct dentry *bios_dir[TPM_NUM_EVENT_LOG_FILES];
>> 
>> @@ -269,6 +270,7 @@ enum tpm2_cc_attrs {
>> #define TPM_VID_INTEL    0x8086
>> #define TPM_VID_WINBOND  0x1050
>> #define TPM_VID_STM      0x104A
>> +#define TPM_VID_ATML     0x1114
>> 
>> enum tpm_chip_flags {
>> 	TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2		= BIT(1),
>> -- 
>> 2.29.0.vfs.0.0
>> 
>> 
> 
> /Jarkko

Hao


  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-24  5:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-20 23:18 [PATCH] Fix Atmel TPM crash caused by too frequent queries Hao Wu
2021-06-23 13:35 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-06-24  5:49   ` Hao Wu [this message]
2021-06-29 20:06     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-06-30  4:27       ` Hao Wu
2021-06-24  5:33 ` Hao Wu
2021-06-29 20:07   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-06-30  4:22   ` [PATCH] tpm: fix ATMEL " Hao Wu
2021-07-02  6:35     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-02  7:12       ` Greg KH
2021-07-02  7:33       ` Hao Wu
2021-07-02  7:35         ` Hao Wu
2021-07-02  7:45         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-02  7:59           ` Hao Wu
2021-07-02  8:42             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-02 11:57               ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-02 19:16                 ` Hao Wu
2021-07-05  5:19                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-05  5:29                     ` Hao Wu
2021-07-04  0:07     ` Hao Wu
2021-07-05  7:15       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-05 23:09         ` Hao Wu
2021-07-06 12:34           ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-07  4:18             ` Hao Wu
2021-07-07  4:34               ` Hao Wu
2021-07-07  4:31     ` [PATCH v2] " Hao Wu
2021-07-07  9:24       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-07 18:28         ` Hao Wu
2021-07-07 21:10           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-09  4:43             ` Hao Wu
2021-07-09  4:40     ` [PATCH v2] tpm: fix Atmel " Hao Wu
2021-07-09 17:47       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-09 19:23         ` Hao Wu
2021-07-11  7:37           ` Hao Wu
2021-07-16  5:30             ` Hao Wu
2021-07-11  7:51       ` [PATCH v3] " Hao Wu
2021-07-27  2:46         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-07-27  3:40           ` Hao Wu
2021-08-14 22:25         ` [PATCH v4] " Hao Wu
2021-08-26  5:38           ` Hao Wu
2021-08-26 16:24             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-08-27  0:35               ` Hao Wu
2021-09-04 21:14                 ` Hao Wu
2021-09-04 23:15                   ` Hao Wu
2021-09-05  3:51           ` [PATCH v5] " Hao Wu
2021-09-07 17:43             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-09-08  8:33               ` Hao Wu
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-09-26 22:31 [PATCH] Fix " Hao Wu
2020-09-26 22:57 ` James Bottomley
2020-09-26 23:10   ` Hao Wu
2020-09-27 18:25     ` James Bottomley
2020-09-28  0:11       ` Hao Wu
2020-09-28  0:15         ` Hao Wu
2020-09-28  1:22         ` James Bottomley
2020-09-28  5:59           ` Hao Wu
2020-09-28 22:11             ` James Bottomley
2020-09-29  4:46               ` Hao Wu
2020-09-30  2:16               ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-30 14:54                 ` James Bottomley
2020-09-30 15:37                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-30 20:48                     ` James Bottomley
2020-09-30 21:09                       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-30 22:31                         ` James Bottomley
2020-10-01  1:50                           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-10-01  4:53                             ` James Bottomley
2020-10-01 18:15                               ` Nayna
2020-10-01 18:32                                 ` James Bottomley
2020-10-01 23:04                                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-10-17  6:11                                     ` Hao Wu
2020-10-18  5:09                                       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-10-18  5:20                                         ` Hao Wu
2020-11-14  4:39                                           ` Hao Wu
2020-11-18 21:11                                             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-11-18 23:23                                               ` Hao Wu
2021-05-09  6:18                                               ` Hao Wu
2021-05-09  6:31                                                 ` Hao Wu
2021-05-10  2:17                                                   ` Mimi Zohar
2021-05-10  3:15                                                     ` Hao Wu
2021-05-10 17:28                                                     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-28  1:08       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-28  6:03         ` Hao Wu
2020-09-28 14:16           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-28 17:49             ` Hao Wu
2020-09-28 19:47               ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-28 20:27                 ` Hao Wu
2020-09-30  2:11                   ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-30  3:41                     ` Hao Wu
     [not found]                       ` <EA1EE8F8-F054-4E1B-B830-231398D33CB8@rubrik.com>
2020-10-01 14:16                         ` Mimi Zohar
2020-09-14  6:13 Hao Wu
2020-09-14  6:17 ` Greg KH
2020-09-15  2:52 ` Hao Wu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=51DCB704-8E9D-40DD-9E81-F1D16EB28BD5@rubrik.com \
    --to=hao.wu@rubrik.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=anish.jhaveri@rubrik.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hamza@hpe.com \
    --cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=kgold@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
    --cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
    --cc=seungyeop.han@rubrik.com \
    --cc=shrihari.kalkar@rubrik.com \
    --cc=why2jjj.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).